Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
On Twitter: MrMichaelLee and PostSports  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS

Jamison to Cleveland?


You and me, teammates? (AP Photo)


Probably the most compelling part of Ivan's story today on the woeful Wizards was the conclusion, when Team President Ernie Grunfeld said he planned on holding on to his core group. Grunfeld has been making the same claim all season, but here it is again:

And despite this disastrous season, he is not ready to break up the core of Arenas, Butler and Jamison.
With Thursday's trade deadline looming, Grunfeld said he has received plenty of interest in his players and would consider a move if the right deal came along. But he also would still like to see the current core have a chance to be healthy at the same time.
"I like our players," Grunfeld said. "If you look at our players on paper: Gilbert, Antawn, Caron, DeShawn, Brendan and the collection of other players like Darius, Mike James, Blatche and the young guys, I think we can compete with most teams in the league. But, you have to have the group together for a while so they can develop some chemistry and get a sense of what their roles are. Once we get our group together, there's a solid foundation."

Injuries to Gilbert Arenas and Brendan Haywood have made it difficult for Grunfeld to evaluate what kind of team he really has. But that hasn't kept teams from calling Grunfeld with the hopes of raiding an 11-42 team that will enter luxury tax territory with a high lottery pick next summer. Sports Illustrated's Ian Thomsen is reporting that the Cleveland Cavaliers are making a hard pitch to get Antawn Jamison in exchange for Wally Szczerbiak's expiring contract. The Cavaliers would, in turn, use Jamison as a sixth-man supreme in a championship run. That seems like Pau Gasol-Kwame Brown-level larceny to me -- a two-time all-star averaging 21.4 points and 9.1 rebounds in exchange for cap space?!?! -- but ESPN's Chad Ford mentioned it as one of five trades that should happen before the Feb. 19 deadline.

Here's Thomsen:

A move like this -- a championship contender adding a two-time All-Star scorer and rebounder without touching the top seven players in its rotation -- would be the closest thing to a blockbuster in this year's trading-deadline market. Jamison would put enormous pressure on the Celtics, whose front line has already been challenged by the departures of James Posey and P.J. Brown.
"If Cleveland can get Jamison, that will be a home run,'' said an Eastern Conference executive with knowledge of the talks. "Jamison would give them a big boost -- he can finish games with them, and he's a slasher who will get more open shots playing with LeBron. I think that would clinch [the NBA Finals] for them. Boston would have a tough time with them.''

Here's Ford:

Why should the Cavs do it?
The team wants to win a title now and could use an upgrade at the 4. Adding Jamison would give the Cavs another dynamic scorer and veteran.
Why should the Wizards do it?
Because they are paying a huge amount of money for one of the worst teams in basketball. When Gilbert Arenas returns, they'll be better, but by how much? This deal would put them slightly below the cap next year.

I have a hard time seeing Abe Pollin signing off on a deal that would send one his favorite players since Wes Unseld to a conference rival that has eliminated Washington from the playoffs the past three seasons. And for nothing more than an expiring contract? That's almost insulting. I totally understand why the Cavs would want Jamison since he's consistently given them the business in the postseason.

But, you have to figure that the Wizards have known this was a lost season for a few months. Grunfeld knows this team is terrible mostly because of key injuries, not because of an underachieving roster. I can't fathom Jamison or Caron Butler in another uniform this season. But what do you think? Should the Wizards start cleaning house?


By Michael Lee  |  February 17, 2009; 4:18 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Other Side: Minnesota Timberwolves
Next: Trade Rumors Update

Comments

noooooooooooo

Posted by: DMoney28 | February 17, 2009 4:23 PM | Report abuse

This would make me puke.

Posted by: dingersoll1 | February 17, 2009 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Ivan, how can you call a Jamison deal larceny? Jamison is 32 yrs old going on 33. Sure he's putting up nice numbers but its not helping us win games. Jamison's value around the league is limited due to his age, long term deal he signed this past offseason and the fact he's known for being on of the worst defenders in the league. Jamison is no Gasol.

Also, were freakin' 11-42. Is Jamison's leadership really that irreplaceable on a team with 11 wins in 53 games?

Trade Jamison now why we still can. The great part of this deal is that Wally makes a shade under $14 mil so we'd have to give them another contract in return. They might not want Stevenson because of the bad blood b/w him and LeBron, but what about Songaila who's got 3 more years on his deal? That's clearing more than $14 million off you cap next year in one fell swoop.

We have Blatche who's capable of putting up decent numbers in Jamison's place and with Jamison gone the team defense will likely improve. With the savings, we can certainly keep our high lottery pick and who knows, we might get lucky with Blake Griffin and get a blue chip long term replacement at PF.

Bottom line, this team was going no where with Jamison. At his age and salary its time to wish him the best, send him to a contender and move on. I have no problem sending him to Cleveland. Let them deal with future cap hell and two guys who couldn't defend to save their lives.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 4:35 PM | Report abuse

"We have Blatche who's capable of putting up decent numbers in Jamison's place and with Jamison gone the team defense will likely improve."

Really? How?

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

Ivan, how can you call a Jamison deal larceny?

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 4:35 PM


because its for Wally rofl Zerbiak. F(_)[k that guy

Posted by: prescrunk | February 17, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

The only good that would come out of this would be:
1) Jamison might actually win a championship (good for him),
2) the Wiz would get rid of Etan (which I thought would be impossible)
3) would surely give us the worst record (maybe the top pick), and
4) would put us under the cap (whoop-di-do).

Sending him to the Cavs of all places would be, sickening, vile and well, many other words could describe it.

Posted by: lameotron | February 17, 2009 4:40 PM | Report abuse

AJ is not the type of player that makes this team a chapionship team. At best he would be a good sixth man to come in a give a team some scoring off the bench without having to play defense.

Posted by: bulletsfan78 | February 17, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

How does getting rid of the team's best defensive rebounder (Jamison) and its strongest man-to-man post defender (Songaila) and replacing them with thin air improve the defense?

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Ivan you keep pointing towards injuries as an excuse for our suckiness but at what point do we stop using injuries as an excuse?

Even heatlhy, the big three never won more than 45 games together and that was back in the Larry Hughes days.

This is a mediocre roster with limited financial flexibility to get better. Were loaded with average players with above average contracts in Stevenson, Songaila, James & Thomas and its eating up our cap.

This team is piss poor at the fundamentals. It takes approximately one ball reversal for our defense to break down completely. We've had one of the worst defenses in the league, even when completely healthy. We typically ranked at the bottom of the league in assists, even when healthy. We were a poor defensive rebounding team, even when heathly.

It's time to stop using excuses to maintain mediocrity and try to build a winner. We know what we can do with this roster. Lose to Cleveland in the first round year after year. Grunfeld needs to admit his mistakes and try to rebuild on the fly now. A salary dump of Jamison & Songaila would be a bold first step in the right direction.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I agree with the earlier post. Let's be realistic instead of idealistic. I love AJ. He's a great pro, great guy, has helped the wiz get to the playoffs for 4 straight years, and HE HAS BEEN PAID WELL TO DO IT! He's almost 33. Does anyone really think that our core can contend for a championship, especially with Gilbert as such a big "?" mark? If we could clear $14 million in cap space next year(let's wish that ET or DSong can be included in that deal), why not go for it? Could we get much worse than we are now? No place to go but up!

Again, AJ is great, but this year proves, he is good as a specialist off the bench to score (remember his days on the Mavs?), but not as an integral cog on a championship team. With the possibility of a luxury tax at the same level, our top 3 pick will need to be traded or stashed away (maybe Rubio for a year) but that's a gamble, because the SC or LT could decline in 2010. Do we want to risk that?

Folks, teams do this all the time with good players to rebuild for the future. Our core group has been hurt a lot, but they have had opps, and the window might be closing on any chance this group has of going deep in the playoffs. We definitely should entertain this deal or another like it. Would like to keep CB though. Might be the one to build around at his age.

Just a few thoughts..

Ron

Posted by: faninAlex | February 17, 2009 4:50 PM | Report abuse

Similar to my trade proposal I posted last week involving Jamison to the Cavs, I think this deal should only be considered by the Wizards if they can get a future prospect(s) out of it. If the Cavs throw in JJ Hickson or a future pick or two, I think the Wizards would have to seriously contemplate it.

As the trade stands right now, all this does is save money for the franchise. I believe ridding Jamison's contract only slightly puts us under the cap, so the actual cap space we save can't really be used to add anybody in the offseason. It really would be like giving away Jamison for nothing in terms of the future.

Posted by: psps23 | February 17, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

"Grunfeld needs to admit his mistakes and try to rebuild on the fly now. "

Rebuilding on the fly is a pipe dream that fans like to toke on. In reality it almost never works. That's what the Knicks and Celtics tried to do after Ewing and Bird left. We saw how well that worked out. They were mired in mediocrity for more than a decade. The Wiz either need to find a way to build around their core or blow the entire thing up and start completely from scratch. They can't do both at the same time.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:51 PM | Report abuse

"Folks, teams do this all the time with good players to rebuild for the future. "

Trading Jamison for cap space isn't rebuilding for the future. It's a money saving salary dump.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:53 PM | Report abuse

How does getting rid of the team's best defensive rebounder (Jamison) and its strongest man-to-man post defender (Songaila) and replacing them with thin air improve the defense?

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:41 PM

Because moving those two gives you the financial wherewithall to make other moves. Like keeping our high lottery pick for example. Or taking back salary in another trade.

IMO Jamison's impact offensively & on the defensive boards are offset by the fact the Wizards coaching staff have built their entire defensive philosophy of protecting paint around this sieve. We aren't winning anything of significance with Jamison guarding PFs night in and night out.

Also you have got to be kidding me about Songaila? Our best man-to-man post defender? Are you serious? Are we talking about the same guy? The 6-8, short armed stubby guy with a 5-inch vertical? Songaila may give effort & provide "toughness" but he's woefully undersized and unathletic. When teams see him in the middle, they attack the basket with vigor. He can't contest shots, he's a horrible rebounder and he gets outquicked on a regular basis.

Songaila might not hurt you as a 10-15 minute guy off the bench at backup PF, but at $4.2 million a year for the next three seasons, its a luxury we can live with out.

And just to note, if you think he's our best post defender, then you definitely forgotten about Brendan Haywood.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Last i checked, Haywood was out, likely for the entire season. Or did you forget?

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:55 PM | Report abuse

"Because moving those two gives you the financial wherewithall to make other moves. "

No, actually, it doesn't. It doesn't get them far enough under the cap to make any significant FA moves. In fact, it may actually hurt them, because once a team falls under the cap they lose the right to spend the MLE. And I'm not certain that this deal would actually create an amount of cap space equal to or greater than the MLE. And if it doesn't, it actually takes away the amount of FA money Grunfeld will have to spend.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Trading Jamison for cap space isn't rebuilding for the future. It's a money saving salary dump.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:53 PM

Call it what you want, but right now we are so backed into a corner that we can't make any additions talent wise to this roster. That's not because we don't want to spend the money, it's because we can't spend the money.

As we've seen, Abe has no problem spending to make this team better, but with all our prohibitive contracts something has to be done. You may wax poetic about how great Jamison & Songaila are but the fact is they are key figures in a team that has an 11-42 record.

Jamison & Songaila ain't that irreplaceable.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 5:00 PM | Report abuse

"Jamison & Songaila ain't that irreplaceable."

Didn't say they were. But trading them for Szerbiack gives the Wizards nothing of value to replace them with.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:01 PM | Report abuse

Ron

Thank god there is someone else who understands the game of basketball on here.

Great post

Posted by: bulletsfan78 | February 17, 2009 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Last i checked, Haywood was out, likely for the entire season. Or did you forget?

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:55 PM

Wow, your shortsighted. Exactly what are we still fighting for this year? You still think we have an outside shot at that #8 seed?

This move isn't about now, its about next year and beyond. It would be nice if the Wizards took that long term approach for once. Because right now, were looking at losing Haywood in the offseason of 2010 b/c we'd have no money to pay him.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 5:03 PM | Report abuse

"Jamison & Songaila ain't that irreplaceable."

Didn't say they were. But trading them for Szerbiack gives the Wizards nothing of value to replace them with.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:01 PM

It does. It's called cap flexibility. It allows us to make other moves down the line or keep players or assets that we would'nt have been able to keep otherwise (like Haywood in 2010 or/and our 1st rounder this summer)

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 5:05 PM | Report abuse

I LOVE IT!

holding on to a 32-yr-old veteran with 3 more years at $10 mil+ per year is the kind of stupid thinking that has made the Bullets/Wizards a terrible franchise over the last 25 years. The luxury tax threshold is dropping next year, and we can't even afford to sign our 1st round pick!

if we move Jamison now while someone is still willing to take on his salary, plus we could get rid of Etan or Songaila's deal, we'd have the flexibility to rebuild FAST while trotting out a strong young lineup of Arenas, Young, Butler, Griffin or Jordan Hill or Greg Monroe, and Haywood.

if we hold onto Jamison, we're dooming ourselves to 3 more years of mediocrity.

we HAVE to make this trade if we ever hope to make anything out of the Arenas/Butler era.

Posted by: brianc2540 | February 17, 2009 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Ever notice that there are two types of posts in the blogosphere? They are:

1. "You SUCK!!!!"
2. Everything else.

Posted by: Samson151 | February 17, 2009 5:06 PM | Report abuse

"This move isn't about now, its about next year and beyond."

Exactly. Which means that your claim about getting rid of Jamison and Songaila improving the defense is utter nonsense. It won't do a damn thing to improve the defense in the short term. In fact, it'll make it even worse. And, in the long-term, the return to health of Haywood will improve the defense regardless of whether Jamison and Songaila are here. So the notion that getting rid of those two and getting nothing in return is somehow integral to the long-range defensive improvement of the team is pure BS.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:08 PM | Report abuse

"Because moving those two gives you the financial wherewithall to make other moves. "

No, actually, it doesn't. It doesn't get them far enough under the cap to make any significant FA moves. In fact, it may actually hurt them, because once a team falls under the cap they lose the right to spend the MLE. And I'm not certain that this deal would actually create an amount of cap space equal to or greater than the MLE. And if it doesn't, it actually takes away the amount of FA money Grunfeld will have to spend.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 4:58 PM

Again, its not about just signing a free agent. Honestly IMO, the worst thing we could do is waste the MLE on another Medium Level player. We've got enough of those in James, Songaila, Thomas & Stevenson. All guys signed using the MLE. All eating our cap.

It's about creating room to either acquire talent using our expirings next year. Or letting those expirings expire and actually creating some cap space for the following year. Or as I just said, keeping talent & assets that may have been on the chopping block otherwise.

I don't know about you. But I'd take our top 5 lottery pick this year over a 32 yr old Jamison and I'd certainly take a re-signed Haywood at C over Songaila.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 5:10 PM | Report abuse

Trade him for JJ. Hickson and an expiring contract. I like Jamison for his professionalism but he can't play defense. Yes he averages 21 ppg but he probably gives up 18 ppg.

Posted by: fj8152001 | February 17, 2009 5:11 PM | Report abuse

"It does. It's called cap flexibility. It allows us to make other moves down the line or keep players or assets that we would'nt have been able to keep otherwise (like Haywood in 2010 or/and our 1st rounder this summer)"

None of which requires trading their best player for nothing. Dixon's and Dee Brown's expiring contracts create the cap space they need to sign their rookie pick without going over the tax threshold. And none of their other players will up for renewal until after next season when Thomas, James, and Haywood's deals will be expiring.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Jamison is a 20pt/game 10 rebounds/game pro & leader.
He will never be mistaken for a defensive stopper but every other team would love to have those numbers.
You'll never get fair value for him. So keep him & hope for a healthy team next year.
I don't think any team is going to part with anyone for AJ that will help the Wizzies this year or in the future . This season is gone why bother even thinking of a trade. When AJ,CB,GA,BH & DS or ???? are healthy this team can beat anyone.


Posted by: VBFan | February 17, 2009 5:14 PM | Report abuse

"It's about creating room to either acquire talent using our expirings next year. Or letting those expirings expire and actually creating some cap space for the following year. Or as I just said, keeping talent & assets that may have been on the chopping block otherwise."

Wrong. They don't need to create room to use their expiring contracts in a trade. Trades have to be done with matching salaries, so they can only take back as much salary as they give up, so no trade they do will result in a net increase of their cap number. And, as i just explained, none of their assets (at least none that they plan to keep) are currently on the chopping block.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:14 PM | Report abuse

"I don't know about you. But I'd take our top 5 lottery pick this year over a 32 yr old Jamison and I'd certainly take a re-signed Haywood at C over Songaila."

And, again, it's not an either or issue.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Everyone, (including Ernie) need to listen to what ever Kalorama says. I mean, he’s just so smart. I’m sure he could coach and GM at the same time, Isaiah 2.0.

Posted by: cj658 | February 17, 2009 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Dat2U is spot-on. Cap space is completely misunderstood. First of all, the luxury tax threshold is dropping next year, and w/o moving Jamison we'll be over that line. That means that we would be paying double for any move we make in the off-season, including signing our draft picks.

Second, its not always about signing FAs. signing MLEs has historically been somewhat of a disaster for alot of teams, b/c it only worsens your cap issues. and signing someone else's big money FA doesn't always pay off either, b/c you usually have to overpay on the free market. what cap flexibility does allow you to do though is retain your own players that you want to keep (like maybe Haywood, or the young guys we choose to re-sign down the line... like Young and McGee) and it allows you to be a player in the trade market. if we keep Jamison, we're locked into alot of long-term deals that we can't get out of and nobody's going to want, we can't even sign our own draft picks, and jamison becomes less and less movable as his skills decline.

Third, subtracting Jamison alone should improve our defense. he is an awful defender, but would be good for a team like Cleveland where he can just come off the bench and score/rebound.

Posted by: brianc2540 | February 17, 2009 5:22 PM | Report abuse

"This move isn't about now, its about next year and beyond."

Exactly. Which means that your claim about getting rid of Jamison and Songaila improving the defense is utter nonsense. It won't do a damn thing to improve the defense in the short term. In fact, it'll make it even worse. And, in the long-term, the return to health of Haywood will improve the defense regardless of whether Jamison and Songaila are here. So the notion that getting rid of those two and getting nothing in return is somehow integral to the long-range defensive improvement of the team is pure BS.

Again, what are you exactly trying to accomplish this season? This season is already lost. It's about next year when we'll have a different coach and hopefully a different mentality & culture towards defense.

And lets face it, Jamison is part of that culture in which defense is an afterthought. He's the team leader, he's the guy that supposedly others look up to. And what's his reputation around the league? It's one as an all-offense, no defense type player. His effort on the defensive end doesn't equal the effort on the offensive end. That's not the type of leadership a team with aspirations of a long playoff run should have.

You could replace Jamison with a replacement level player, and the defense would improve simply b/c Jamison wouldn't be out there to get manhandled or abused on a nightly basis.

You can say what you want about Songaila, he may do all the right things, but he cannot challenge shots and he cannot rebound.

I'm not sure why you feel so strongly about maintaining continuity of this roster considering how bad we currently are but some folks would actually like to see a team that has chance in the playoffs in the future.

Were capped out and we suck and have little room to improve. We could lose Jamison & Songaila and we'd still suck but at least we'd have the ability to try to make some improvements. At some point you have to go in a different direction.

Posted by: Dat2U | February 17, 2009 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Don't forget that Jamison can still be a valuable piece of a rebuilding team, as a pro's pro who can teach the kids how to do it right.

I wouldn't mind moving him to gain future cap flexibility -- and even if he stays, I see him more as a key sixth man rather than a starter beyond this season. But he has a lot to offer not only contending teams, but young teams as well.

I think, ultimately, that the Wiz would benefit more by moving him, if (and only if) they can also shed Thomas' or Songaila's contract. But just moving him for cap space won't get it done. Not enough benefit for the Wiz in the long run, IMO, since he still has value both on the court and in the locker room.

Posted by: keithward64 | February 17, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Ernie Grunfeld's only goal should be bringing Washington a championship, not preventing from Cleveland winning one. If trading Jamison to the Cavaliers brings us closer to that goal, then do it.

With that being said, I'm having a hard time believing that Jamison isn't worth more than what Cleveland is offering.

Posted by: Tank2 | February 17, 2009 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Look at Oklahoma/Seattle -- they traded an again star (Ray Allen) for a draft pick that they used to select Jeff Green and expirings.

Trading Jamison might be o.k., but for what is the question. For just an expiring contract? No way -- you don't trade a star just to cut salary, and this deal doesn't even give the Wizards cap room. For an expiring contract and a very good young player or players? OK, now we're talking. I like Hickson, but he's not enough.

BUT -- if the Wizards ever hope to make it to the Finals or Eastern Conference Finals, Cleveland poses an obstacle. Giving away your best healthy player to Cleveland makes that obstacle much more insurmountable.

Posted by: disgruntledfan | February 17, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

How does getting rid of the team's best defensive rebounder (Jamison) and its strongest man-to-man post defender (Songaila) and replacing them with thin air improve the defense?”

If those are the two best options in those respective categories, then we were doomed to begin with. Trade should happen, for the EXACT reason you just mentioned.

I also find it very ironic that some of the same people who are on the “Griffin bandwagon” can actually disagree with this trade. With no AJ, Blake becomes the man. For all you who love Blake so much, he would have been riding the pine behind AJ anyways. This move would free up TONS of cap space from a team that was not going anywhere near the finals anyways. You already have 2 veteran scorers in Gil and CB. AJ is expendable. But to the person who stated above that AB will put up decent numbers in AJ’s place, I wouldn’t bet on it. Make up your mind.


“Rebuilding on the fly is a pipe dream that fans like to toke on”

Where do you come up with this stuff??

Posted by: cj658 | February 17, 2009 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Teams rebuild on the fly all the time... the Spurs were rebuilt on the fly when David Robinson was injured and they drafted Tim Duncan. The Pistons rebuilt on the fly when Dumars took over by playing defensive-minded basketball with a limited-talent roster and then fleecing Jordan for Rip Hamilton and signing Chauncey. Dumping Jamison and another contract for Wally's expiring deal would give us the flexibility to put a good young team around Arenas/Butler over the next 3-4 years, and it instantly improves or defense just by replacing jamison with an average defender. and if we get Hickson in the deal too, even better.

Posted by: brianc2540 | February 17, 2009 5:35 PM | Report abuse

When AJ,CB,GA,BH & DS or ???? are healthy this team can beat anyone.

And lose to anyone.

Posted by: jones-y | February 17, 2009 5:41 PM | Report abuse

"I'm not sure why you feel so strongly about maintaining continuity of this roster considering how bad we currently are but some folks would actually like to see a team that has chance in the playoffs in the future."

Who said anything about continuity? I said they should think about breaking up the big 3 if they went out in the first round last season, before the playoffs even started. This isn't about continuity. This is about simple, basic principles of good business. Giving away a valuable asset and getting nothing of real value in return is a bad business move. And, in this instance, it's a bad basketball move. It's really just that simple.

"Were capped out and we suck and have little room to improve. "

And, as I've already explained in detail, moving Jamison does little to alter that. Moving Jamison doesn't give them the cap room to do anything over the summer, but keeping Jamison and using their expiring contracts, either as trade chips or letting them expire to create cap space will allow them to do all of the things you claim that giving away Jamison will do. The difference is that it will allow them to make those moves in addition to Jamison, which means that instead of replacing 20 and 10, they'd be adding to it. Addition by addition, you could call it..

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

No way -- you don't trade a star just to cut salary

Plenty of GMs have done exactly that.

Posted by: jones-y | February 17, 2009 5:45 PM | Report abuse

from RotoTimes: "I think moving Jamison is a no-brainer, simply for financial reasons. The team is on the hook for $76 million (14 players) next season, and $60 million (10 players) for the year after that. If they could move Jamison (who has three and a half seasons left on his deal) for an expiring contract, they would save nearly $25 million next season by avoiding the luxury tax and have about $10 million dollars available for 2010. If they could find a way to sneak Etan Thomas, Mike James, Brendan Haywood, Darius Songaila, or DeShawn Stevenson into the deal, there would be no excuse to avoid it."

Posted by: brianc2540 | February 17, 2009 5:51 PM | Report abuse

,i>"Teams rebuild on the fly all the time... the Spurs were rebuilt on the fly when David Robinson was injured and they drafted Tim Duncan."

They didn't "rebuild" anything, They added a championship player to their existing core which already included a future HoFer.

"The Pistons rebuilt on the fly when Dumars took over by playing defensive-minded basketball with a limited-talent roster and then fleecing Jordan for Rip Hamilton and signing Chauncey."

Nope. The Pistons were 30-52 the previous season with a healthy roster. Over the next two years they turned over almost their entire roster, with Ben Wallace being the only holdover from the pre-Dumars era. That's not rebuilding on the fly. That's rebuilding from the ground up.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:52 PM | Report abuse

All this talk about the dreaded Lux Tax is ridiculous. The Wiz have been collecting the tax redistribution for years and this year they are one of only a handful of teams that will be sharing the funds. If the threshold does drop, as expected, the Wiz would be wise to look at it as refunding just a drop of what they have collected recently.

Management has avoided making deals that would put them over the Luxury Cap, but that does not mean that they would run scared if they had to exceed it to sign the #1 Pick in the draft. Especially knowing that it would only be for one year rather than signing a FA to a mult-year deal that could put you over the limit for years to come.

Posted by: SportzWiz | February 17, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

"Teams rebuild on the fly all the time... the Spurs were rebuilt on the fly when David Robinson was injured and they drafted Tim Duncan."

They didn't "rebuild" anything, They added a championship player to their existing core which already included a future HoFer.

"The Pistons rebuilt on the fly when Dumars took over by playing defensive-minded basketball with a limited-talent roster and then fleecing Jordan for Rip Hamilton and signing Chauncey."

Nope. The Pistons were 30-52 the previous season with a healthy roster. Over the next two years they turned over almost their entire roster, with Ben Wallace being the only holdover from the pre-Dumars era. That's not rebuilding on the fly. That's rebuilding from the ground up.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Exactly, SportWiz. What I find ironic/hypocritical is that the some of the same people who have been hammering Pollin for supposedly being cheap are now on the bandwagon for a deal whose primary benefit is to save Pollin money.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Some commenters correctly say that receiving only Szczberiak's expiring contract would not be helpful, and suggest that the deal would be better if (a) Songalia or Etan were thrown in as well, and/or (b) the Cavs added Hickson. Certainly option (a) would be nice, but if Ernie were somehow able to pry Hickson from the Cavs, that would be huge. He's very young, very athletic, and has an enormous upside if he gets proper coaching (that is, not Tapscott, Ayers, et al.)

Posted by: dzl1 | February 17, 2009 5:58 PM | Report abuse

What I find ironic/hypocritical is that the some of the same people who have been hammering Pollin for supposedly being cheap are now on the bandwagon for a deal whose primary benefit is to save Pollin money.

Posted by: kalo_rama | February 17, 2009 5:55 PM

It also makes the team better! Jamison is 32 years old and is not getting better. His defense is already PITIFULLY bad, and his 3 more years at $10+ mil are not going to become a better value as he ages. and if we can use him to off-load Etan or Songaila, and if we can get a young PF like Hickson too, this is an absolute no-brainer.

overvaluing overpaid veterans has been the Wizards/Bullets kiss of death for too long.

Posted by: brianc2540 | February 17, 2009 6:01 PM | Report abuse

As someone who has always loved AJ and thought he was unappreciated I have to say, it might be time to go. If we can make room for the draft with him on the roster, and if we have confidence that McGuire, Young, and McGee can be legitimate reserves that can help are healthy starting 5 win, and you can clear cap space to sign a lottery pick (ala loading off Etan and DeSong) then do not trade AJ. After all, we have only seen AJ, Arenas, and Butler healthy together for a few months 2 years ago (and they were #1 in the East). However, if the Wiz honestly look at themselves a see a team that will not be back in it for another year or more then for AJs sake and the teams future let him go. Either way please do something to get rid of Blatche, he is a waste of space.

Posted by: mcgratsp | February 17, 2009 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Yes, trade Jamison...I agree fully with this move. Only if the Wizards get to keep Blatche and McGuire in this trade because they are scorers and defenders and one of them can come off the bench.

The Wizards need an enforcer and Jamison is not an enforcer around the rim like Perkins on the Celtics. I wish the Wizards could get Dejuan Blair from Pitt (manhandled UConn).

An enforcer will immediately help the Wizards next year.

I believe in Ernie Grunsfeld...WAY BETTER than Wes Unseld.

Posted by: clifton3 | February 17, 2009 6:55 PM | Report abuse

We make this trade because when a GM allows his emotions dictate moves (despite what Abe Pollin wants, if I'm Ernie, I pushed for this deal kicking and screaming down to the wire). This is like seeing the Old Boston Celtic teams in the late 80s and early 90s age before our eyes and Red kept the team together because of the nostalgia associated with the guys from their earlier success.

However, in our case, we never won a title. Never won a conference title. And only made it the conference semi-finals. Once. What do we REALLY have to lose?

We take Wally's contract but we ask for their 1st round pick (late 20's) and Daniel Gibson. In return, we send them Jamison and throw in Etan Thomas/Songalia. Cleveland gets a huge upgrade at the 4, a real professional who will not disrupt the chemistry in the Cav's locker room and a serviceable Big Man who will serve as insurance and come off the books before the Cav's need to resign Lebron in the summer of 2010.

Its a win-win situation. Especially for us. And with our high draft pick, we can luck out and get B. Griffin. If not, we can select J. Harden, who will be that stud two guard (who also has a great post up game) that can compliment C. Butler and Gilbert.

Posted by: jinbahji@hotmail.com | February 17, 2009 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Sadly, I say yes to this deal.

Jamison is not getting any younger, and this does two things:

1) Tells your team ANYONE is tradable, no one is safe so play better.

2) Admit your mistakes and start rebuilding for the future.

They trade Jamison, they better darn get the #1 pick and use it on the kid from Oklahoma.

They should also ask for Clevelands #1 as well. If they think Jamison can put them over, they will give it up.

Also it gives Jamison a chance to win a title now. This team is not going to win a title even when it's healthy. I think EG is kidding himself on that one.

- Ray

Posted by: rmcazz | February 17, 2009 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Whatever...forget the wiz.....bad move all around....

Posted by: joe12341 | February 17, 2009 7:38 PM | Report abuse

The way I read it, it was not Wally for AJ, but rather Wally for AJ and a toxic asset - the "Poet" This may be the only humane way to get the Poet off the roster.
I wouldn't make the trade if Songalia was the second part. He could be a backup PF. The Poet has no position on the court.

Posted by: lrmc623 | February 17, 2009 7:50 PM | Report abuse

How can so many of you Wizard fans supporting trading a good player to Cleveland of all teams? If anything, wouldn't you want to send them a crappy player? I mean, screw the Cavs

Posted by: djnumb | February 17, 2009 11:11 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company